What If Eric Carr Was the Original Drummer

[domino65]

You change any one member and you likely change the full trajectory of history. Way too many elements involved to make it a sure thing, Beth saved Destroyer because the band gained much more national attention and appearances like the Paul Lynde Special. It may have not been a song in their true vein, but it boosted airplay, album sales, etc. and thus made the band more visible to where they got a major boost in recognition and fan discovery. The album was pushed to the front of record store displays and found its way into so many more homes. Without Peter that does not happen. Gene and Paul were simply not replacable. Frehley helped give them a sound that appealed to what would become their core fanbase. Gene and Paul wanted a drummer who was capable of being a frontman type from behind the kit and that is why they brought Peter into the fold.

My guess is they would have hung around with a big cult following but would have never been superstars on the level they were. They would have ultimately been written off in the big picture as a novelty and never made the Rock Hall or lasted this long. The four faces would have never become iconic as they are now. We are all just having fun speculating here, so there is no right answer. But we do know that Peter was a very important cog in the original machine and his part in their success will only be denied or diminished by those who dislike him and are not being truly objective about it. Gene and Paul continue to admit that without the four originals, they would not be here now. That's a very impactful and true statement. Those in the band's inner circle always credited the success of Beth to being a major turning point at a critical time. You can dispute how much Peter wrote of it, but not the fact that he brought it to the band, and performed it. The lyrics also contain direct references to his personal life (you say you feel so empty, our house just ain't a home, is directly from phone conversations with him and Lydia). Beth is a total Peter Criss vehicle. Without him, Beth never exists and we fall into complete unpredictability after Alive!

Carr was perfect for the post-classic era. I started to think about another scenario where Kiss started in the 80s, but then thought they sould have had no shot at being on the radar without what they did in the 70s. They don't get on MTV if someone doesn't call in a favor or if they don't have a storied past by that point.

well said

[joma5477]

It amazes me how delusional some people are in thinking that KISS would have made it no matter what.

I mean just missing a train in daily life and that important meeting or interview that would have changed your life puts you on a completely different life path now.

We all know what it is like for our alarm clock to not go off and we are freaking out trying to get to work, because we know now that the rest of the day is going to be fucked and you might have to stay late now. Something as simple as that, changes your day to day.

If it wasn't those particular 4 members, their entire day to day life and history would have changed - thus probably not meeting Aucoin, who hooked them up with Bogart, etc.

I hate to wake people from their slumber, but the songs were not that strong where there might be a bidding war on the band from numerous labels.

You do realize there's no way to know, right? You very well may be right that they would have failed if you changed anything...but no one knows how much different things would have been otherwise and what it would have sounded like. You can't say KISS would have just sounded like KISS of 80/81 if Eric joined from the start or how they sounded after Ace left. It's incredibly unlikely that's what it would have sounded like. I'm sure the songs would have come out different based on his input as an official member and the time period. What THAT would have sounded like, I have no idea. What he played later was an interpretation of the original, based on the time period, and I'm sure based largely on P&G's input.

[Grand Classic]

It amazes me how delusional some people are in thinking that KISS would have made it no matter what.

I mean just missing a train in daily life and that important meeting or interview that would have changed your life puts you on a completely different life path now.

We all know what it is like for our alarm clock to not go off and we are freaking out trying to get to work, because we know now that the rest of the day is going to be fucked and you might have to stay late now. Something as simple as that, changes your day to day.

If it wasn't those particular 4 members, their entire day to day life and history would have changed - thus probably not meeting Aucoin, who hooked them up with Bogart, etc.

I hate to wake people from their slumber, but the songs were not that strong where there might be a bidding war on the band from numerous labels.

You do realize there's no way to know, right? You very well may be right that they would have failed if you changed anything...but no one knows how much different things would have been otherwise and what it would have sounded like. You can't say KISS would have just sounded like KISS of 80/81 if Eric joined from the start or how they sounded after Ace left. It's incredibly unlikely that's what it would have sounded like. I'm sure the songs would have come out different based on his input as an official member and the time period. What THAT would have sounded like, I have no idea. What he played later was an interpretation of the original, based on the time period, and I'm sure based largely on P&G's input.

Sure there is - I have explained it. Sure we can play make believe and say that some other label would have been interested in them, but even still - they probably would not have been given all the chances that Casablanca gave them to make it and would have been dropped.

I am quite certain they wouldn't have made it if it was done EXACTLY how it was. Same for countless things in life.

[doombies]

I don’t know, what if he was? How are we supposed to know?

What if Ace and Peter were the co-founders of KISS, and Paul and Gene were the hired hands?

[joma5477]

Sure there is - I have explained it. Sure we can play make believe and say that some other label would have been interested in them, but even still - they probably would not have been given all the chances that Casablanca gave them to make it and would have been dropped.

I am quite certain they wouldn't have made it if it was done EXACTLY how it was. Same for countless things in life.

Like I said, you may very well be right...maybe even likely. But we don't know what the material sounds like. Maybe it's similar enough not to make much a difference. Maybe it's worse. But maybe it's better and there's more early appeal. I can't say on something I haven't heard. And even if we could hear it, there are so many other variables involved that even if the thought was it's better, it may not have been more successful.

[KISS_BLOOD]

Hard to picture as a big fan of Peter Criss and not a fan of Eric. It is the same with any original member, I can not even think of anyone else in their place and it being the same.

[KISS_BLOOD]

Hard to picture as a big fan of Peter Criss and not a fan of Eric. It is the same with any original member, I can not even think of anyone else in their place and it being the same in the 70s.

[So Cruel]

Eric instead of Peter would have totally changed their sound. It was the combination of the 4 individuals that made Kiss. Nothing done after 78 was as strong as before 78. Take away Beth and Kiss never sees the mainstream success. The whole picture changes with Peter.

[battra]

Totally different chemistry. We would have never heard of them. Peter was the most experienced musician out of the original four.

So you think with the gimmick, the live shows and the songs they wrote they wouldn’t have made it without Peter?

Peter brought beth.

Without it, Kiss is Black Oak Arkansas or Black'n Blue.

I.e. NOBODY.

[battra]

They wouldn't have made it past 1976.

Again, why? The appeal to bored housewives of an AM radio ballad that was mostly the work of two other people? Eric could have written something much better if he were there at the time and only needed help with the lyrics.

Quick question...

What other big hits did Kiss have before or after that song?

Peter brought in Kiss's biggest hit at just the right time.

This is Peter Criss in 1976.



The idea that Eric could've written much better songs...

Well... I've heard the whole album he wrote and the whole Kiss catalog he was on, and frankly, he didn't write a single better song than Beth, at least in a commercial sense.

[Mr Slow]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

[battra]

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

How many gimmick bands last?

The answer is ever so few.

Kiss lasted because Beth saved them.

[Mr Slow]

Peter brought beth.

Without it, Kiss is Black Oak Arkansas or Black'n Blue.

I.e. NOBODY.

We don’t know that. What if the very next album unearths a Paul song that becomes a top 10 hit and they springboard into mega stardom from there? Sure Beth was hugely important at that time but to suggest if it didn’t happen KISS were doomed is to downplay everything else they had going for them in the mid/late 70’s.

You honestly think this fails because Beth doesn’t exist? If so, you have zero faith in anything they did from mid 1976 onwards. It’s really that simple.

[Grand Classic]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

[Mr Slow]

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

How many gimmick bands last?

The answer is ever so few.

Kiss lasted because Beth saved them.

Haha what?!?! We’re talking about a band that survived nearly 50 years on a gimmick! Beth gave them a boost but no way it saved them. Something else would’ve happened. KISS at that time was an irresistible force. They would have made it even without a fluke single.

[Mr Slow]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

[Rockandrolloverman]

The drums are very rare to carve out your own style of sound on


but Peter did it


and his unique style was the integral part of the early kiss sound

We obviously do not know what would happen without him, but it is reasonable to say he was a vital part of the early success

[Grand Classic]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

Yes. You seem to be living in a fantasy world with many of your posts. And no I don't. Any other label would have dropped them after an album or two for not having the songs. Casablanca needed them to pay off because they had so much invested in KISS.

[Mr Slow]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

Yes. You seem to be living in a fantasy world with many of your posts. And no I don't. Any other label would have dropped them after an album or two for not having the songs. Casablanca needed them to pay off because they had so much invested in KISS.

You’re completely forgetting ALIVE had gone platinum the year before and KISS were well on their way. We know DESTROYER stalled but to say they were done for is pretty much dismissing the next 2 studio albums and ALIVE II. They built up enough good will with ALIVE (platinum) and DESTROYER (gold) to have at least gotten another couple albums grace before there was any contracts getting burned. It was a different industry back then.

[Grand Classic]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

Yes. You seem to be living in a fantasy world with many of your posts. And no I don't. Any other label would have dropped them after an album or two for not having the songs. Casablanca needed them to pay off because they had so much invested in KISS.

You’re completely forgetting ALIVE had gone platinum the year before and KISS were well on their way. We know DESTROYER stalled but to say they were done for is pretty much dismissing the next 2 studio albums and ALIVE II. They built up enough good will with ALIVE (platinum) and DESTROYER (gold) to have at least gotten another couple albums grace before there was any contracts getting burned. It was a different industry back then.

Alive wouldn't have existed on any other path. It was the last ditch effort for Casablanca to try and break the band that no other label would have ever paid for after 3 albums that sold poorly.

[Mr Slow]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

Yes. You seem to be living in a fantasy world with many of your posts. And no I don't. Any other label would have dropped them after an album or two for not having the songs. Casablanca needed them to pay off because they had so much invested in KISS.

You’re completely forgetting ALIVE had gone platinum the year before and KISS were well on their way. We know DESTROYER stalled but to say they were done for is pretty much dismissing the next 2 studio albums and ALIVE II. They built up enough good will with ALIVE (platinum) and DESTROYER (gold) to have at least gotten another couple albums grace before there was any contracts getting burned. It was a different industry back then.

Alive wouldn't have existed on any other path. It was the last ditch effort for Casablanca to try and break the band that no other label would have ever paid for after 3 albums that sold poorly.

That’s a separate issue. I thought we were currently talking about Beth and DESTROYER.

[Grand Classic]

I know we all love Peter’s unique drumming style but do we think KISS would not have exploded with ALIVE if it was someone else on there? Was Peter’s style the thing that made KISS huge or was it the sum of all parts, lead by a great gimmick and a rockin’ batch of songs?

I believe any one of them could have been replaced and the band still breaks through. To suggest it had to be all 4 of them is naive in my opinion. As much as Paul wrote some great tunes and Ace’s style was an absolute blessing, there were loads of other great musicians out there that could have been just as good. You might lose some of the uniqueness of it if Bob Kulick got the gig instead of Ace, but if we never heard Ace play we wouldn’t know what we were missing.

Gene is the hardest to replace as he brought the biggest personality to it and it was his arrogance and self belief, not to mention the character he created, that drew in the most people initially. The other 3 guys were just guys in weird clothes and face paint. They weren’t far away from what Slade, Wizzard or even Bowie was doing at the time. But Gene was the one who captured the attention the most. He was scary and dangerous and added credibility to something that could easily have been dismissed as silly.

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

Yes. You seem to be living in a fantasy world with many of your posts. And no I don't. Any other label would have dropped them after an album or two for not having the songs. Casablanca needed them to pay off because they had so much invested in KISS.

You’re completely forgetting ALIVE had gone platinum the year before and KISS were well on their way. We know DESTROYER stalled but to say they were done for is pretty much dismissing the next 2 studio albums and ALIVE II. They built up enough good will with ALIVE (platinum) and DESTROYER (gold) to have at least gotten another couple albums grace before there was any contracts getting burned. It was a different industry back then.

Alive wouldn't have existed on any other path. It was the last ditch effort for Casablanca to try and break the band that no other label would have ever paid for after 3 albums that sold poorly.

That’s a separate issue. I thought we were currently talking about Beth and DESTROYER.

Yes, with no real hit song if Beth didn't exist and studio albums that were not setting the world on fire, KISS wouldn't have gone much further even with Peter. Alive and Destroyer wouldn't have existed at all otherwise.

[Mr Slow]

They wouldn't have made it to Alive!, if anything changed from what it was.

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

Yes. You seem to be living in a fantasy world with many of your posts. And no I don't. Any other label would have dropped them after an album or two for not having the songs. Casablanca needed them to pay off because they had so much invested in KISS.

You’re completely forgetting ALIVE had gone platinum the year before and KISS were well on their way. We know DESTROYER stalled but to say they were done for is pretty much dismissing the next 2 studio albums and ALIVE II. They built up enough good will with ALIVE (platinum) and DESTROYER (gold) to have at least gotten another couple albums grace before there was any contracts getting burned. It was a different industry back then.

Alive wouldn't have existed on any other path. It was the last ditch effort for Casablanca to try and break the band that no other label would have ever paid for after 3 albums that sold poorly.

That’s a separate issue. I thought we were currently talking about Beth and DESTROYER.

Yes, with no real hit song if Beth didn't exist and studio albums that were not setting the world on fire, KISS wouldn't have gone much further even with Peter. Alive and Destroyer wouldn't have existed at all otherwise.

So nothing KISS did after March 1976 was any good? Ok then...

[Grand Classic]

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

Find an equally good drummer, create an equally cool makeup design and put him onstage with everything else they had going for them and NOTHING changes. To suggest all of this hinges on just one element is ludicrous. I know it was the chemistry and creativity that made them great, but you’re suggesting it had to be those 4 people or it all falls apart. I just can’t get onboard with that at all.

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

It is reality in regards to having to have it be those 4 particular people and the path they went on, but feel free to live in your fantasy world.

My fantasy world? In your mind KISS made it big because of their music!

Yes. You seem to be living in a fantasy world with many of your posts. And no I don't. Any other label would have dropped them after an album or two for not having the songs. Casablanca needed them to pay off because they had so much invested in KISS.

You’re completely forgetting ALIVE had gone platinum the year before and KISS were well on their way. We know DESTROYER stalled but to say they were done for is pretty much dismissing the next 2 studio albums and ALIVE II. They built up enough good will with ALIVE (platinum) and DESTROYER (gold) to have at least gotten another couple albums grace before there was any contracts getting burned. It was a different industry back then.

Alive wouldn't have existed on any other path. It was the last ditch effort for Casablanca to try and break the band that no other label would have ever paid for after 3 albums that sold poorly.

That’s a separate issue. I thought we were currently talking about Beth and DESTROYER.

Yes, with no real hit song if Beth didn't exist and studio albums that were not setting the world on fire, KISS wouldn't have gone much further even with Peter. Alive and Destroyer wouldn't have existed at all otherwise.

So nothing KISS did after March 1976 was any good? Ok then...

There sure as shit wasn't a hit song in there until KISS went disco. What songs we may enjoy is something else entirely, but again - none of this would have existed if not for Paul, Gene, Ace and Peter and the specific path they went on.

[battra]

Peter brought beth.

Without it, Kiss is Black Oak Arkansas or Black'n Blue.

I.e. NOBODY.

We don’t know that. What if the very next album unearths a Paul song that becomes a top 10 hit and they springboard into mega stardom from there? Sure Beth was hugely important at that time but to suggest if it didn’t happen KISS were doomed is to downplay everything else they had going for them in the mid/late 70’s.

You honestly think this fails because Beth doesn’t exist? If so, you have zero faith in anything they did from mid 1976 onwards. It’s really that simple.

Do I think Paul Stanley or facepaint fails?

Either way.

Paul had not had any hits and was not responsible for any albums that recouped their costs.

So, up till Alive!, Paul, like the rest of the band was a failure.

Alive! hit the zeitgeist and everyone assumed the band was a one hit wonder.

Beth saved them.

[battra]

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

How many gimmick bands last?

The answer is ever so few.

Kiss lasted because Beth saved them.

Haha what?!?! We’re talking about a band that survived nearly 50 years on a gimmick! Beth gave them a boost but no way it saved them. Something else would’ve happened. KISS at that time was an irresistible force. They would have made it even without a fluke single.

I have no idea why you think:

A. Kiss was an unstoppable force. Had Alive! not hit, you realize Kiss's money source dries up and they go back and get 9-5 jobs right?

B. That Kiss without Peter Criss at that point was still Kiss and would be subject to the same rules.

[TheSpoiler]

Beth was a hit in the US and Canada. It wasn't even a blip on the radar for the rest of the world. It wasn't this world-striding behemoth of a hit that, say I Was Made For Lovin You was. I'm sure it paid a lot of bills tho.

[Expert Texpert]

Aside from the Beth issue, has anyone considered how things would have panned out of ace had no partner in crime in those early days? He may have bailed a couple of albums in. That would certainly change things.

[jkiss]

KISS have had almost 50 years of touring and recording and are still one of the biggest bands ever, yet most people only know maybe 4 or 5 KISS songs. So despite how we feel about the music and those who created it, to the masses it really wasn’t that important.

I think that is pretty good if people in general know 4-5 KISS songs. I would be surprised if 'people' (whoever they are) would even know 4-5 Pink Floyd songs when it comes right down to it; as people in general don't remember all that much & nor do they all that well with what they can.

I personally have an excellent memory, but when you have one ...you realize (+ continuously) how terrible everyone else's typically is. It's actually kind of sad ...I couldn't imagine not remembering the vast majority of my own life 'properly'.

I wouldn't 'wish' anymore KISS on Eric than he had experienced in his life, even if he begged me to. I really don't feel, nor did it appear to me they always treated him with the kind of respect he totally deserved; even as much as he absolutely loved the idea of being in a band like KISS.

[Mr Slow]

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

How many gimmick bands last?

The answer is ever so few.

Kiss lasted because Beth saved them.

Haha what?!?! We’re talking about a band that survived nearly 50 years on a gimmick! Beth gave them a boost but no way it saved them. Something else would’ve happened. KISS at that time was an irresistible force. They would have made it even without a fluke single.

I have no idea why you think:

A. Kiss was an unstoppable force. Had Alive! not hit, you realize Kiss's money source dries up and they go back and get 9-5 jobs right?

B. That Kiss without Peter Criss at that point was still Kiss and would be subject to the same rules.

But because we’re talking about Beth, ALIVE had already hit big and they were starting to consistently fill arenas. The ALIVE tour averaged 8,000. So they were well on their way.

When I use the term “unstoppable force” I mean it as a live act and as a concept. It was great timing that Beth struck gold but to me KISS didn’t necessarily need it. With the image and the live following they were building they were destined for superstardom at the time regardless.

To say otherwise is completely dismissing what came after. ROCK AND ROLL OVER, LOVE GUN, ALIVE II, they all would have still happened. The record label wasn’t going to drop a band that had a platinum album and a gold follow up. They had at least a couple more albums grace.

[jkiss]

So even with Gene & Paul’s songwriting and their unrelenting drive and determination, Ace’s unique guitar playing and song writing, and the amazing gimmick, they fade away after a year all because Peter’s swing style of playing isn’t there? You’re kidding right?

How many gimmick bands last?

The answer is ever so few.

Kiss lasted because Beth saved them.

Haha what?!?! We’re talking about a band that survived nearly 50 years on a gimmick! Beth gave them a boost but no way it saved them. Something else would’ve happened. KISS at that time was an irresistible force. They would have made it even without a fluke single.

I have no idea why you think:

A. Kiss was an unstoppable force. Had Alive! not hit, you realize Kiss's money source dries up and they go back and get 9-5 jobs right?

B. That Kiss without Peter Criss at that point was still Kiss and would be subject to the same rules.

But because we’re talking about Beth, ALIVE had already hit big and they were starting to consistently fill arenas. The ALIVE tour averaged 8,000. So they were well on their way.

When I use the term “unstoppable force” I mean it as a live act and as a concept. It was great timing that Beth struck gold but to me KISS didn’t necessarily need it. With the image and the live following they were building they were destined for superstardom at the time regardless.

To say otherwise is completely dismissing what came after. ROCK AND ROLL OVER, LOVE GUN, ALIVE II, they all would have still happened. The record label wasn’t going to drop a band that had a platinum album and a gold follow up. They had at least a couple more albums grace.

Yes, I would guess without "Beth" they could've gotten themselves into the early 1980's; although, for me personally (& in retrospect) ...maybe that's all I really needed. I almost think it would've been better if KISS simply vanished after their final "ALIVE II" tour show. Perhaps made it look like they were snatched by E.T. aliens & beamed-up to an U.F.O. flying saucer. And nobody knows, KISS is just gone (no trace); however, they return 20 years later, in say 1998 ...& do five or so more years of shows, then vanish again, forever.

[Nately120]

Peter not being in KISS means he cleans up his act and gets the gig drumming for Elton John in the late 70s. Elton John records a version of Beth that Peter brings him for one of those albums Elton made when he was getting lyrics from people who weren't Bernie Taupin and the album goes platinum and Peter and Elton both go on a huge bender and do "stuff under the covers" while super high. After that Peter makes the ho-hum solo albums in the late 70s and 80s that Nigel Olsson made.

END SCENE

[Mr Slow]

I almost think it would've been better if KISS simply vanished after their final "ALIVE II" tour show. Perhaps made it look like they were snatched by E.T. aliens & beamed-up to an U.F.O. flying saucer. And nobody knows, KISS is just gone (no trace); however, they return 20 years later, in say 1998 ...& do five or so more years of shows, then vanish again, forever.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
I can’t even imagine a world without UNMASKED, CREATURES, REVENGE, CARNIVAL OF SOULS (4 of my top 5) or without all those magical moments between 1978 and 1997. Even to have the last decade or so erased is something I wouldn’t be happy about. Warts n all, I’m glad we had a pretty consistent 47 years of KISStory.

[jkiss]

I almost think it would've been better if KISS simply vanished after their final "ALIVE II" tour show. Perhaps made it look like they were snatched by E.T. aliens & beamed-up to an U.F.O. flying saucer. And nobody knows, KISS is just gone (no trace); however, they return 20 years later, in say 1998 ...& do five or so more years of shows, then vanish again, forever.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
I can’t even imagine a world without UNMASKED, CREATURES, REVENGE, CARNIVAL OF SOULS (4 of my top 5) or without all those magical moments between 1978 and 1997. Even to have the last decade or so erased is something I wouldn’t be happy about. Warts n all, I’m glad we had a pretty consistent 47 years of KISStory.

And that's the same problem some may have with erasing Peter from KISSTORY, plus this idea he wasn't at all needed or there wasn't much value in what he brought to the band.

[Mr Slow]

I almost think it would've been better if KISS simply vanished after their final "ALIVE II" tour show. Perhaps made it look like they were snatched by E.T. aliens & beamed-up to an U.F.O. flying saucer. And nobody knows, KISS is just gone (no trace); however, they return 20 years later, in say 1998 ...& do five or so more years of shows, then vanish again, forever.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
I can’t even imagine a world without UNMASKED, CREATURES, REVENGE, CARNIVAL OF SOULS (4 of my top 5) or without all those magical moments between 1978 and 1997. Even to have the last decade or so erased is something I wouldn’t be happy about. Warts n all, I’m glad we had a pretty consistent 47 years of KISStory.

And that's the same problem some may have with erasing Peter from KISSTORY, plus this idea he wasn't at all needed or there wasn't much value in what he brought to the band.

I’m not suggesting he didn’t bring value. My point was that with everything they had going for them in the beginning (which was arguably as good as it gets) they could almost have swapped out any guy and still become massive.

As fans we grew to love Paul’s voice, Ace’s guitar etc. but we also love lots of other singers & guitarists. And I think people suggesting that without Beth they were doomed are really selling everything else they did very short.

[jkiss]

I almost think it would've been better if KISS simply vanished after their final "ALIVE II" tour show. Perhaps made it look like they were snatched by E.T. aliens & beamed-up to an U.F.O. flying saucer. And nobody knows, KISS is just gone (no trace); however, they return 20 years later, in say 1998 ...& do five or so more years of shows, then vanish again, forever.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
I can’t even imagine a world without UNMASKED, CREATURES, REVENGE, CARNIVAL OF SOULS (4 of my top 5) or without all those magical moments between 1978 and 1997. Even to have the last decade or so erased is something I wouldn’t be happy about. Warts n all, I’m glad we had a pretty consistent 47 years of KISStory.

And that's the same problem some may have with erasing Peter from KISSTORY, plus this idea he wasn't at all needed or there wasn't much value in what he brought to the band.

I’m not suggesting he didn’t bring value. My point was that with everything they had going for them in the beginning (which was arguably as good as it gets) they could almost have swapped out any guy and still become massive.

As fans we grew to love Paul’s voice, Ace’s guitar etc. but we also love lots of other singers & guitarists. And I think people suggesting that without Beth they were doomed are really selling everything else they did very short.

I'd say even right down to their individual make-up designs there was 'something' some kind of 'magic' with those exact ones. It just worked. It's hard to imagine if everything didn't happen the way it really did, that everything would've worked-out to become what they became.

Although, I am someone that believes the odds were totally against them. And I did spend enough time in NYC (didn't live there ...grandparents did) to realize how almost impossible it was to rise to the top coming from that city (+ being who they each were) & at that time in history. I can even remember NYC in the 1960's. And when I read what they all wrote about what it was like growing-up there ...I can understand it & imagine it, almost perfectly.

[joma5477]

Beth was a hit...but it looks like Beth and Forever were fairly comparable hits... Did Forever completely change the landscape of the band? I don't think it did... I think people are maybe overstating the importance of Beth just a bit.

[Mr Slow]

Beth was a hit...but it looks like Beth and Forever were fairly comparable hits... Did Forever completely change the landscape of the band? I don't think it did... I think people are maybe overstating the importance of Beth just a bit.

It’s hard for me to believe that if Beth had not been an accidental hit that KISS would have been finished, like some here are suggesting. The band had so much going for it in 1976 that I see Beth as a huge bonus rather than a career saving necessity.

[Grand Classic]

Beth was a hit...but it looks like Beth and Forever were fairly comparable hits... Did Forever completely change the landscape of the band? I don't think it did... I think people are maybe overstating the importance of Beth just a bit.

Apples and oranges. They still play Beth and Forever has been pretty much forgotten.

[jkiss]

Beth was a hit...but it looks like Beth and Forever were fairly comparable hits... Did Forever completely change the landscape of the band? I don't think it did... I think people are maybe overstating the importance of Beth just a bit.

I would never liken "Beth" to "Forever" ..."Beth" significantly raised their profile & legitimized KISS as a high-charting contemporary band, something to pay attention to whether or not they liked (or thought it was in good taste) with what all they were projecting, etc; especially, within the entertainment industry (music, television, related product manufacturers, etc).

"Beth" was a legitimate hit & did bring-out people to the table that likely wouldn't have given KISS much thought, otherwise (RE: 'the girls'). And just the same, it did drive some away from the group; although, I'd say more so due to the fact KISS appeared to be repeating what happened with Alice Cooper (RE: Bob Ezrin) or going in the same general direction Alice was, at the time. And not everyone was all that pleased with Alice & Bob's direction ...& going 'solo' (ditching the original group & all the related drama/controversy).

[Nellcote71]

Couldn’t stand Carr playing/singing,

Silly post

[Mr Slow]

Beth was a hit...but it looks like Beth and Forever were fairly comparable hits... Did Forever completely change the landscape of the band? I don't think it did... I think people are maybe overstating the importance of Beth just a bit.

Or underestimating the importance of Forever. Without that song there’s no HITS tour. I’d say Beth was a bonus but Forever was necessary. The band was in better shape in 1976 than they were in 1989. No lucky hit in ‘76 and they move on to the next album, still riding high from the success of ALIVE. But in ‘89 they’re literally out of options until Forever hits the top 10.

Of course, decades later and one song has more than stood the test of time while the other as merely of the time, but in that moment Forever was probably more of a career saver than Beth ever was.

[Mr Slow]

Couldn’t stand Carr playing/singing,

Silly post

Stop the thread everyone. Negative Nelly didn’t like Eric Carr. Everybody please move on to another topic.

[Nellcote71]

Couldn’t stand Carr playing/singing,

Silly post

Stop the thread everyone. Negative Nelly didn’t like Eric Carr. Everybody please move on to another topic.

Thnx bro

[Mr Slow]

Couldn’t stand Carr playing/singing,

Silly post

Stop the thread everyone. Negative Nelly didn’t like Eric Carr. Everybody please move on to another topic.

Thnx bro

[Vatreni]

Totally different chemistry. We would have never heard of them. Peter was the most experienced musician out of the original four.

LOL....

[joma5477]

Beth was a hit...but it looks like Beth and Forever were fairly comparable hits... Did Forever completely change the landscape of the band? I don't think it did... I think people are maybe overstating the importance of Beth just a bit.

Or underestimating the importance of Forever. Without that song there’s no HITS tour. I’d say Beth was a bonus but Forever was necessary. The band was in better shape in 1976 than they were in 1989. No lucky hit in ‘76 and they move on to the next album, still riding high from the success of ALIVE. But in ‘89 they’re literally out of options until Forever hits the top 10.

Of course, decades later and one song has more than stood the test of time while the other as merely of the time, but in that moment Forever was probably more of a career saver than Beth ever was.

Disagree. The HITS tour began 3/11/90. Forever peaked 4/20/90. Even if Forever debuted earlier and hit climax mid-April, the tour was still booked well before.

[In the Suds]

Beth was a hit...but it looks like Beth and Forever were fairly comparable hits... Did Forever completely change the landscape of the band? I don't think it did... I think people are maybe overstating the importance of Beth just a bit.

You don't see any difference between 1976 and 1990?

lol ok

[joma5477]

You don't see any difference between 1976 and 1990?

lol ok

I think Beth was great for them and they were thrilled with its success. I don't know that the band was toast without it...

"Destroyer sold well upon its release on March 15, 1976 and was certified gold on April 22. Although exact sales figures are not known, Stanley stated that the album initially sold 850,000 copies in the US, well in excess of any of Kiss's first three studio albums."

Beth wasn't released as a single until August. Destroyer was certified Platinum in November. Surely Beth influenced some sales, but it sounds like it was doing okay as it was if it already had 850k sold before Beth hit...

[In the Suds]

You don't see any difference between 1976 and 1990?

lol ok

I think Beth was great for them and they were thrilled with its success. I don't know that the band was toast without it...

"Destroyer sold well upon its release on March 15, 1976 and was certified gold on April 22. Although exact sales figures are not known, Stanley stated that the album initially sold 850,000 copies in the US, well in excess of any of Kiss's first three studio albums."

Beth wasn't released as a single until August. Destroyer was certified Platinum in November. Surely Beth influenced some sales, but it sounds like it was doing okay as it was if it already had 850k sold before Beth hit...

My point was that a hit in 1990 couldn't change everything the way a hit in 1976 could.